>> schieffer: today on "face the nation"-- let's talk politics and there's plenty to talk about. the president made good on his pledge to demonstrate the gulf coast is still a great vacation destination. but in a year of political irony, he's also up to his neck in political trouble with his liberal base. while the republican establishment tries to figure out what to do about its conservative wing and the tea party. and now a new controversy over building that mosque at ground zero. we bring in four of the best from the two sides: governor ed rendell from pennsylvania; democratic party chair, tim kaine; former party chair ed gillespie; and legendary republican strategist ed rollins. we will get analysis from john

harris of politico and karen tumulty of "the washington post." then, final thoughts on melvin laird, the long-ago secretary of defense who is worried about the all-volunteer army he created and where we are in afghanistan. but first, american politics on "face the nation." captioning sponsored by cbs "face the nation" with cbs news chief washington correspondent bob schieffer. and now from washington, bob schieffer. >> schieffer: good morning, again. well, it is not often that a president pleases people on both sides of the political spectrum. but it is fair to say, when president obama said muslims have a right to build a mosque near ground zero where the twin towers fell, it pleased many on the liberal left; and it is also fair to say that it just delighted many on the republican right, because they feel it is an issue they can use against

him, not only in the coming elections but all the way into 2012. so i want to start there, and i'm going to poll the delegation this morning. governor rendell, did the president say the right thing, and was it good politics? >> well, i don't know if it's good or bad politics, but i can't imagine that any american, given the challenges facing this country, going to vote based on what he said about the mosque. the mosque is an unfortunate situation, but we do have a right to practice our religion freely wherever we choose. rights are not subject to the popular vote. >> ed gillespie? >> it was a revealing comment by the president. he said that the 70% of americans who are opposed to this controversial imam building this controversial mosque at ground zero are denying the freedom of muslims in this country. that's how he cast it. it was said in the reporting this morning that he made a conscious decision to weigh in on it in that regard.

i think it tells you that he has a very disdainful view of the american people. i think that's why his favorability ratings have come down. people see that in him. there's a kind of condescension towards americans they don't like. >> tim kaine? >> i'm going with my virginians, james madison and thomas jefferson, on this one. they put the religious freedom to worship in the first amendment of the constitution for a reason. this wouldn't be a controversial if it was to build a synagogue or church. i'm not the new york zoning commissioner, don't know the reason for the citing decision, but we can't stop people from doing something that others could do because of the religion they practice. >> schieffer: but what about the politics of it? >> well, look, you know, as ed said, the constitution is the constitution. you know, we see an awful lot of republicans going out and saying "we have to respect the constitution." and that means we have to respect it. we can't tarnish people's first amendment rights, we shouldn't be going around raising wacky

ideas like redrafting or withdrawing the 14th amendment. the president is reminding us of that. >> schieffer: you know about new york politics, so what's your view? >> probably the dumbest thing that any president has said since michael dukakis said it was okay to burn the flag. it was similar, this is an emotional issue. intellectually, this is not a good issue. people who lost people in new york, do not want that mosque. >> schieffer: so you see it as an issue that's going to continue? >> no question about it. every candidate who's in the challenge districts is asked how do you feel about building the mosque on the ground zero site? >> schieffer: you know, we're going into this election in a year that is really, really fraught with irony. you have democrats saddled with a bad economy, high unemployment

among many on the democratic base. the core of this president's base-- unemployment among african-americans is now 12.5%. to the point that some people are saying that the unemployed may be the swing vote in this coming election. republicans, on the other hand have... find themselves suddenly with some... unusual candidates. people who have taken very extreme views on things. and one thing that comes to mind is the senate race up there in connecticut, where you have linda mcmahon who is formerly, or maybe she is still part of the world wrestling federation, formerly an executive to that. she winds up as the republican candidate up there. i have to say one thing, she really packs a lot of kick. i mean, just watch this video here. ( laughter )

>> schieffer: i expect republicans are going to be seeing that video a lot this year and they're going to have to defend it. is this somebody who's going to be good for the republican party? is this a good image for republicans to have? i mean, if the president's gonna -- every candidate is going to have to defend what the president did on the mosque down there, is this one kind of a tough one for you guys? >> well, a couple of things, bob, you can show the footage of president obama when he was running for president appearing on w.w.e., calling out the voters there and saying, "can you smell what barack is cooking?" so not long ago, the democrats thought the w.w.e. was a great place to go to talk to voters. linda mcmahon is not an establishment politician, not a career washington figure, not someone who is a conventional

candidate. and this is a good year, by the way, for that, you know, to run against -- and her race has tightened since she got the nomination to run against a career politician in connecticut with a problematic record. on the issues of spending and taxes and deficit and debt and the fact that we need to put a check on president obama and the democratic congress, not hand them a blank check, those are the issues that will matter. >> schieffer: so you're comfortable with her? you think she helps or hurts republicans, overall? >> i think she has a great chance to win in the connecticut senate race, because the voters are making a decision based on which of the two candidates will go to washington to try to change what's going on in terms of record deficits. $1.5 trillion deficit this year. president obama and this white house have created more debt in 20 months than president bush in eight years. unemployment at 9.5% with 1.4 million americans out of the work force-- not even calculated into that when they said it

wouldn't go above 8% because of the stimulus. >> governor kaine, what do you think of this? >> two things, bob. it's not just linda mcmahon, but rand paul, who said the civil rights shouldn't have been passed. and republicans are putting up extreme candidates that are way outside the mainstream of what americans want. with respect to ed gillespie's position about the deficit-- i chuckle to hear ed gillespie, part of the bush administration, criticize democrats about the deficit. a recent analysis by the new york times showed of the current deficit, 55% was caused by bush administration policy, 33% caused by the economic climate, and only 10% caused by decisions that president obama has made since he's been in office. the good news is that the president has said i'm going to

do what the previous democratic president, bill clinton, did-- "i'm going to get control of the deficit." so he's cut domestic spending and frozen discretionary spending, they're making strategic cuts to defense. the republicans tried to block, the only party that's ever done anything about the deficits is the democratic party. >> schieffer: i would also add the democrats have their share of candidates that some of the other democrats might think are rather embarrassing to have on the ticket this year-- charlie rangel being one name that comes to mind. ed rollins, i want to ask you about this. quite frankly, no offense to ed gillespie, who i have been dealing with and know to be a good guy for years and years and years. but he wouldn't be here if the chairman of the republican party currently, michael steele, was willing to go on television. but he's so immersed in controversy that he's kind of in a bunker these days. are republicans going to have to do something about michael steele? >> well, there's no time.

i think it's disaster, you have three men on the show who have - - not me, but the other three who have been party chairman and very distinguished party chairmen. michael steele has failed miserably to do the things you're supposed to do -- raise money and go out and articulate the message. it won't matter though. in 11 weeks from now, it won't matter. what's going to matter is ed gillespie, haley barbour who are raising the resources we need. there are seven incumbent democrats, including harry reid, who are in the fight for their lives. there are four or five democratic seats that any handicapper will give us. in the house, charlie cook, real clear politics, "national" journal would put it at 202 with 31 competitive seats left. 30 of those are democrat seats, so democrats are in big, big trouble, and this should be a great election. >> schieffer: well, let me get

to governor rendell to talk about that. because i've got to say, governor, these unemployment figures-- we have now had 15 months of unemployment above 9%, and that's something of a record in modern times, as far as i know. i don't think we ever had a period of that long, 9%-plus unemployment, since they started to keep track of this back in about 1948, or at least under the current things. how are democrats going to get around that? because, after all, when people are unemployed, they generally blame it on the people in office. and it's a midterm, when democrats are the party in power, normally loses seats anyway. how do you convince people that they ought to stick with this team? >> well, first of all, you have to have people understand that president obama and the democrats inherited a recession

that was caused in 2008, or came to fruition in 2008, and we were losing 750,000 jobs a month then and in the beginning of 2009. now, we're gaining private sector jobs every month. in pennsylvania, in the last four months, we gained 70,000 private sector jobs. number two, who is trying to do something about it? the extension of unemployment benefits-- the republican party almost to a person voted against it; cruelly voted against it. that's number one. number two-- on the bill to save teachers and policemen and firemen's job, except for senator snowe and senator collins, the republican party voted against it. who's trying to bring the economy back, who's trying to stop it for purely political reasons? if the american people understand that, you'll see a change. by the way, in "the washington

wall street journal" poll, things got better by 10% for democrats in the poll. >> schieffer: i want to ask you about a couple of the cultural issues. do you, ed gillespie, think that immigration is going to be an issue? even people who had problems with the current efforts at immigration reform are saying that republicans may have gone a step too far when they start talking about amending the 14th... the constitution, the 14th amendment, which would bar the children of illegal immigrants from having citizenship. that's something that's been with us for a long, long time, and came about as slavery was ended. is this a problem for you? >> i don't think immigration is actually going to be much of an issue in the campaign. >> schieffer: really? >> i think it's an issue in the media quite a bit, but i think the issue in this campaign is going to be jobs and the economy. and if i can correct governor rendell the fact is we have not created jobs every month for the past six months. >> private sector jobs, we have. >> we have 131,000 jobs in july, and the fact is that we have 9.5% unemployment. >> every month in the last six months... >> did we lose 131,000 jobs?

>> private sector jobs have gone up every month. >> so the fact is, americans are looking at the economy and they're very concerned about all of this uncertainty out there. that's why companies are not hiring. we're looking at the largest tax increase in american history that's going to take place on january 1, 2011. it will hit investors, it will hit employees, small business owners. it's going to hit people with children, people who are married. >> schieffer: the bush tax cuts are running out... >> they expire on january 1, 2011. americans will get hit with the largest tax increase in american history, including on dividends and capital gains, and on individual income which affects the small business owners who are responsible for hiring two thirds of the new jobs coming out of a recession. >> tim kaine, i want to go back to you, because harry reid said the other day he cannot imagine why any hispanic would want to vote for republicans, after all of this controversy about immigration has come about.

is that overstating the case, or do you think he is making a good point? >> i think senator reid was making a point that the republican policies, which are so anti-new american, even to the point of shredding up the 14th amendment that was... that's still advertised on the rnc web page, is chasing new americans, not just latinos, into the democratic camp. this is party whose leaders won't even sit down to discuss immigration reform. and yet, they think that doing a political stunt like talking about amending the constitution makes sense. these are key leaders in the party. i think the immigration issue will be an issue in the election because it shows how far and how extreme some of these republican candidates are. >> can i chime in for one second? >> we have got about 40 seconds. >> let me -- >> schieffer: okay, ed, you have to make it really quick. >> we have had two presidents-- president bush, this president

both wanted immigration reform. and where is the immigration bill? they haven't passed it. >> it's waiting for a republican votes in the senate is where it is. >> you have a majority in the senate. you have a majority -- and you have a majority -- >> and president bush torpedoed the immigration reform bill. when he was a senator, he torpedoed the immigration bill. >> schieffer: we seem to have run out of time. we didn't solve it today, but we've got some insights. back after this.

>> schieffer: we're back now with two of washington's top political reporters, karen tumulty from "the washington post" and john harris from politico. i can't get over the irony of what we are seeing here. president obama having trouble with his base, the people on the left; the republicans having trouble with their base, the people on the right of their party. robert gibbs, the white house

press secretary, attacks what he called the "professional left" last week, saying that these people wouldn't be satisfied if dennis kucinich was president or words to that effect. is this by design? is there more going on? >> i think the frustration is clearly real, and it's one that we have been hearing privately from the white house for a long time. and so, you know, it wasn't totally surprising this came out in public. it does seem almost by design the way that the white house hasn't backed off. these guys are foolish if they think they can get a better president who's more in tune with their agenda than president obama. i think it pays to be precise about this, because there's a group of commentators-- that's what he meant by the professional left-- who is unhappy with president obama. self-identified liberals are happy with this president. >> schieffer: do you think he got in a little bit of a fight with the people on the far left so he can appear more of a centrist candidate going into the elections?

>> there is that word from the clinton era-- remember "triangulation"-- a lot of people are speculating about this is obama administration's effort to say, "we're in the middle, yes, the left is unhappy and at a time when independents are fleeing the democratic party according to the polls." >> schieffer: and democrats seem determined to run against george bush. is that going to work, karen? >> you know, i think there's real limits to how far they can get doing that. and as much -- basically, people are very worried about the economy, and not just at how they're feeling about the economy now but what they see going forward. and unless -- unless people feel like it's getting better, the democrats are going to have a problem this fall. >> schieffer: you know, we talk about all these social issues and culture issues, but the fact of the matter was ronald reagan, in his first midterm lost 26 seats-- republicans in the congress-- and unemployment then was only 8%. and now, you know, as we were

saying, people see the unemployed now as maybe the swing vote here. >> but also, if you look at the direction of unemployment, it was actually -- it was steeper going up at that point. and again, that's the real issue. it's what people see in the coming months. >> schieffer: i don't... well, i mean, i kind of take issue with what ed gillespie says about the tea party candidates. i thought from the beginning, tea party was a bigger problem for the republican establishment than maybe it was for democrats. >> right. >> where do you see some of these candidates going, john? isn't it going to be very difficult for them? >> well, it will be interesting -- and ed was valiant on the show, but it would be interesting to talk to him on truth serum as to what he thinks about this. there's no question that the professional operative class, which frankly all of your earlier guests were part of on the show-- they think that the republicans have not nominated the most electable candidates, the most electable candidates, certainly in nevada where harry reid could have been knocked

off. and now he looks to be favored for re-election against sharon angle. no question that the candidate in colorado was not the -- is not regarded as the most electable. >> that does play into... the democrats have a strategy, they keep saying over and over, "this election is a choice, it's not a referendum." it's very difficult for them to sell the policies that are out there. so their best hope and where they'll be spending all the money-- and they have a huge financial advantage-- is going sharply negative. >> do you think, karen, as good of politicians as they were and as smart as the campaign that barack obama ran, especially against hillary clinton-- have they lost a step here? they seem doing things that suggests that they might be tone deaf, like michelle obama going off to spain on vacation and taking 70 secret service agents. and they don't seem to

understand why people say, "was this trip really necessary?" >> that in and of itself not a big deal, but it plays into this in narrative that somehow that the obamas are out of touch with the things that ordinary americans are struggling through. which is why you saw them in panama city, florida, this weekend. it was both an effort to cast a vote of confidence in the gulf, but also to get back in touch with where ordinary americans are. >> schieffer: to be continued. thank you, both. i'll be back in a moment with some final thoughts.

>> schieffer: finally today, i came to washington in 1969, during the nixon administration. my first beat was the pentagon, and the secretary of defense was former republican congressman melvin laird, who i came to

believe was, with a possible exception of lyndon johnson, the best politician i ever knew; certainly, one of the wisest. mel and i became life-long friends. he's well into his 80s now, but he's sharp as ever. and he's worried about the all- volunteer army that he helped to create, and worried about where we're going in afghanistan. in a letter last week, he said the volunteer force has far exceeded his expectations, but that we are asking too much of it now and the "multiple deployments and disregard for the personal and family life of our troops and their emotional well-being threaten to undermine our national security." afghanistan worries him even more. he first went there in 1953 and he said the culture is tribal, not nationalistic, yet we fought eight years and lost a thousand americans yet we are no closer

today to stability, let alone victory." laird remembers how bad intelligence and misunderstanding led us to vietnam, and he wonders now if we have made the same mistakes again. "i know something about misguided wars and how easy it is to get mired down in something that started with the best intentions," he says. mel laird's opinion is one view, and there are others. but mel laird has seen a lot and if he's worried, i guess so am i. back in a minute.

>> schieffer: next week, our guests will be greg mortensen, author of "three cups of tea". we'll talk to him about the advice he's giving to the american military. see you then. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org ,,,,

[ male announcer ] how can rice production in india, affect wheat output in the u.s., the shipping industry in norway, and the rubber industry, in south america? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex global economy. it's just one reason 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment objectives, risks, fees, expenses, and other information to read and consider carefully before investing.